Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Well, for names, since the Bishops are also slow checkmaters, I'd give them names to fit: Conway and Buzzi (it doesn't matter which is which). The Rooks are fine as Trumpets, but I'd go with Left and Right. Ranged Oyster would seem better as Giant Oyster (I do like the Oyster part).

As for icons, the Sloth and Turtle would be the Aardvark and Turtle (respectively) with the Three in front. The Conway and Buzzi could be Abbot and Abbess, either alone or with the Confused emoticon, Grey color, or Hourglass behind. The Trumpets are probably fine as they are (at least until I can figure out and upload a Trumpet icon for the set). A Giant Oyster could be what you use, or perhaps Malkia or Kuhani with the Large modifier.

(I'd do some experimenting to see which of these icons would look best, but I have a few other things going on today, and my brain isn't quite firing on all cylinders.)

Ok. I'm ready to declare a winner. In the 8x8 the fairy piece that delivers mate (major) on the most moves is: fWbrFfD2lfNfrblA with 159 moves from the most difficult position. I tried may other combinations and could not improve it.

I have just seen an FAmR3 checkmating a lone king with the help of it's own king on chessV. But I doubt the technique. Is it that such a piece can do it most times? I do not know how to do the mR3 part here!

AmR3?
Alfil that can travel as a Rook up to 3 squares?
Is the King's move the same as in chess?

Regular kings, yes. The rook3 ability is just for moving! Oh. I meant FAmR3. Also a ferz power. Now I see my mistake!

Bare King?
Checkmate?
Not Stalemate?

It it KP vs K where P stands for FAmR3. Stalemate is a win. Checkmate too.

Perhaps I should enhance the 2-vs-1 applet with the possibility to do divergent pieces, like the 3-vs-1 applet already supports.

A trick is to use the 3-vs-1 applet with one of the pieces useless for checkmating. Like mW or mR. I tried that with FAmW as the other piece, and stalemate as a win. This indeed is generally won.

I think the given move of the Deva here is incorrect, though it could be the Maka Dai Dai Shogi page that's wrong.

I now enhanced the EGT generator to also handle divergent moves, and added buttons to the move-definition aid that would add such moves to a previously made definition.

But why piece made by buttons always includes king’s moves?

Like the button says, it adds the specified moves. So if the piece is already a King (like it is when you first load the page), it adds them to a King. If you want to add them to another piece, you should first define that piece through the 'Set moves' button.

An interesting case is a Bishop that also attacks the square right in front of it, but cannot move there (BfcW). On 8x8 about half of the positions is won. Which is an intermediate value. It appears there also is a fortress draw here: once the bare King reaches the back-rank corner of the other shade than the (augmented) Bishop is on, there is no way to smoke it out. Since the Bishop cannot attack that corner, the King can always return there after zugzwang forced it to leave it; as long as the bare King stays on a square adjacent to the corner the other King cannot attack that square either.

If we also add a color-switching move (e.g. BfW or BfcWbmW), all corners can be attacked, and nearly all positions are won.

The author, H. G. Muller, has updated this page.

Simpler version without rifle-capture.

Edit: Replaced Q51 with Q53, moved.

You posted this with the Checkmating Applet, where it doesn't belong. Please copy-paste it to a new posting in a place where it does belong, and then delete this one.

BTW, why do you always replace a single army in the existing CwDA Diagram? You obviously know what you have to change to make that work, and instead of changing it, you could just add it. And add one or more rows of buttons to select the new armies. Then the Diagram could also play the new armies against each other.

Where should I move it move it?

I posted it here because Simple Snails consist of major pieces.

Where you normally post such Diagrams. Or in any case something CWdA related. It doesn't seem to have anything to do with end-game tables.

Since the AH ('Newt') and DG, which I wanted to use in mini-Onslaught, are rarely used pieces, I had a look at their checkmating abilities. Of course they are both minors, so they must be paired with another minor to be able to force checkmate on a bare King.

The AH is semi-potent, allowing it to force mate together with a forking piece like the Camel, but in the general theory we have seen that a Knight, although forking, is always an exception to this. The Bishop is potent, and can force mate together with almost anything on boards of arbitrary size, so we will not further consider that. The Modern Elephant (FA) performs as well as a Bishop up to 10x10 (the largest size the Applet can handle). Because the AH is not forking, a pair of AH cannot force checkmate at all.

DG is more interesting: the D move makes it a potent piece. So in principle it can perform a checkmating manoeuvre together with any piece. But it is a color-bound piece, so this applies only to corners of its own shade, and if the partner is color bound it must of course be on the opposit shade. This limitation spoils the checkmate of DG + N, even on 8x8. The large leaps make the DG a clumsy piece, and together they cannot drive the bare King to the required corner. On 9x9 all corners are the same shade, and if the DG is on that shade, DG + N can force checkmate.

DG + AH can force checkmate on 8x8, but not on 10x10. Apparently the Newt cooperates better with the DG than a Knight does. If we equip the DG with an additional non-capturing DD ride, it can force the checkmate with AH even on 10x10. (This is relevant for mini-Onslaught, as on its own half the DG would have this move.) So it is a bit of a boundary case.

A pair of DG can force mate on 10x10. Provided they are on opposit shade, of course. Then all corners are deadly, and driving the bare king into a deadly corner is relatively easy.